Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 383 SW2D 579 - Ex Parte Edmonds

Ex Parte Edmonds’s Empirical Analysis

1964

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
February 2008
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 2008

7 state decisions

2019641970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on United States v. United Mine Workers of America · United States v. Shipp · The United States v. Don Fernando De La Maza Arredondo · Pitcock v. State · Ex Parte Henry

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “While these may be good exceptions to plaintiffs petition, the proper place to raise them is in the County Court where they are filed. A mere defect in pleadings does not make the proceedings void, as respondents contend. They may be subject to amendment after proper objection has been sustained.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.